Williams v. Vidmar et al
Filing
33
AMENDED COMPLAINT (Second) against all defendants. Filed byStephen J. Williams. (Theriot, Kevin) (Filed on 5/13/2005)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Benjamin W. Bull, Arizona State Bar No. 009940
Joshua W. Carden, Arizona State Bar No. 021698 (appearing PHV)
Alliance Defense Fund
15333 N. Pima Rd., Suite 165
Scottsdale, AZ 85260
Phone: (480) 444-0020, Fax: (480) 444-0028
Kevin H. Theriot, Missouri State Bar No. 55733 (appearing PHV)
Alliance Defense Fund
15660 W. 135th St.
Olathe, KS 66062
Phone: (913) 829-7755, Fax: (913) 829-7780
Robert H. Tyler, California State Bar No. 179572
Alliance Defense Fund
38760 Sky Canyon Drive, Suite B
Murietta, CA 92563
Phone: (951) 461-7860, Fax: (951) 461-9056
15
Terry L. Thompson, California State Bar No. 199870
Law Offices of Terry L. Thompson
P.O. Box 1346
Alamo, CA 94507
Phone (925) 855-1507
Fax: (925) 820-6034
(designated local counsel)
16
Attorneys for Plaintiff Stephen J. Williams
12
13
14
17
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN JOSE DIVISION
18
19
STEPHEN J. WILLIAMS,
CASE NO. 5:04-CV-4946 JW PVT
20
Plaintiff,
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
v.
PATRICIA VIDMAR, Principal of Stevens
Creek School, WILLIAM BRAGG,
Superintendent of Cupertino Union School
District, PEARL CHENG, BEN LIAO,
JOSEPHINE LUCEY, GARY MCCUE,
GEORGE TYSON, Board members of
Cupertino Union School District, in their
official capacities only,
SECOND AMENDED VERIFIED
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY
AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
Defendants.
SECOND AMENDED VERIFIED COMPLAINT - 1
CASE NO. 5:04-CV-4946 JW PVT
1
Comes now the plaintiff, Stephen J. Williams, by and through counsel, pursuant to the
2 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and this Court’s April 28, 2005 order, and against the
3 Defendants avers the following:
4
I.
5
INTRODUCTION
6
1.
This case is about the Constitutional rights of Stephen Williams, a public school
7 teacher and orthodox Christian.
The Defendants have censored Mr. Williams’ instructional
8 speech and choices of supplemental handouts – chiefly excerpts of primary source documents
9 from America’s founding era, or from state constitutions – containing religious content because
10 Mr. Williams is a Christian. Defendants have ordered Mr. Williams (but no other similarly
11 situated current teacher) – not to speak about Christianity or distribute any supplemental handout
12 unless it appears on a list of authorized handouts that applies only to Mr. Williams. This is a
13 violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution for which Mr. Williams
14 seeks declaratory relief, injunctive relief, costs and attorneys’ fees.
15
II.
16
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
2.
17
This action arises under the United States Constitution, particularly the Fourteenth
18 Amendment; and under federal law, particularly 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201, 2202 and 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983
19 and 1988.
20
3.
This Court has original jurisdiction over these federal claims by operation of 28
21 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1343.
22
4.
This Court has authority to issue the requested declaratory relief under 28 U.S.C.
5.
This Court has authority to issue the requested injunctive relief under 28 U.S.C. §
23 § 2201.
24
25 1343(a)(3).
26
6.
This Court is authorized to award attorneys’ fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988.
27
7.
Venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391 in the Northern District of California
28 because this claim arose there, and the parties reside within the District.
SECOND AMENDED VERIFIED COMPLAINT - 2
CASE NO. 5:04-CV-4946 JW PVT
1
III.
2
INTRADISTRICT ASSIGNMENT
3
8.
Pursuant to L.R. 3-2(e) & 3-5, this case is a civil rights case, in a non-excepted
4 category, suitable for assignment to the San Jose division because the civil action arose in Santa
5 Clara County.
6
IV.
7
IDENTIFICATION OF PARTIES
8
9.
Plaintiff Stephen J. Williams is a resident of Mountain View, California.
9
10.
Defendant Patricia Vidmar is Principal of Stevens Creek School, within the
10
Cupertino Union School District. Among other things, this Defendant is responsible for setting
11 the policies at Stevens Creek School and implementing the policies of Stevens Creek School and
12 the Cupertino Union School District.
13
11.
Defendant William Bragg is Superintendent of Cupertino Union School District.
14 Among other things, this Defendant is responsible for setting and implementing policies for
15 schools within the Cupertino Union School District.
16
12.
Defendant Pearl Cheng is a member of the Board of Education of the Cupertino
17 Union School District. Among other things, this Defendant is responsible for setting policies for
18 schools within the Cupertino Union School District.
19
13.
Defendant Ben Liao is a member of the Board of Education of the Cupertino
20 Union School District. Among other things, this Defendant is responsible for setting policies for
21 schools within the Cupertino Union School District.
22
14.
Defendant Josephine Lucey is a member of the Board of Education of the
23 Cupertino Union School District. Among other things, this Defendant is responsible for setting
24 policies for schools within the Cupertino Union School District.
25
15.
Defendant Gary McCue is a member of the Board of Education of the Cupertino
26 Union School District. Among other things, this Defendant is responsible for setting policies for
27 schools within the Cupertino Union School District.
28
SECOND AMENDED VERIFIED COMPLAINT - 3
CASE NO. 5:04-CV-4946 JW PVT
1
16.
Defendant George Tyson is a member of the Board of Education of the Cupertino
2
Union School District. Among other things, this Defendant is responsible for setting policies for
3
schools within the Cupertino Union School District.
4
17.
Each Defendant is sued in his or her official capacities only.
5
V.
6
STATEMENT OF FACTS
7
8
Background
18.
Plaintiff Stephen J. Williams currently teaches fifth grade at Stevens Creek
9 School (“the School”), which is part of Cupertino Union School District (“the District”).
10
19.
Defendant Patricia Vidmar is the Principal of the School.
11
20.
Mr. Williams has taught for eight years in the District.
12
21.
Mr. Williams has taught fifth grade for five years.
13
22.
History and Social Studies are among the subjects that Mr. Williams teaches the
14 fifth grade students at the School.
15 Conflicts Over Discussions About Religion in the Classroom
16
23.
Mr. Williams is a Christian, and generally adheres to orthodox Christian beliefs as
17 prescribed by the Bible.
18
24.
One of Mr. Williams’ Christian beliefs is that he must follow all of the rules of
19 the school and district, and to comply with federal and state law regarding the discussion of
20 religion in public schools
21
25.
Mr. Williams understands and admits that he is not permitted to “proselytize” or
22 seek to convert his students to Christian beliefs.
23
26.
Principal Vidmar is aware that Mr. Williams is a Christian.
24
27.
In June 2003, Principal Vidmar expressed her concern that Mr. Williams, as a
25 Christian, would allow his faith to intrude into the classroom. She did not mention specific
26 incidents or complaints involving Mr. Williams or his faith.
27
28
SECOND AMENDED VERIFIED COMPLAINT - 4
CASE NO. 5:04-CV-4946 JW PVT
1
28.
Mr. Williams expressed to Principal Vidmar his understanding that he is not
2
allowed to “proselytize” his personal religious beliefs to students when acting as a public school
3
teacher.
4
5
29.
Williams “Why do we say ‘under God’ in the Pledge of Allegiance?”
6
7
In September 2003, at the beginning of class, a School student asked Mr.
30.
Mr. Williams facilitated a short discussion among the students about the reasons
for “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance.
8
31.
Mr. Williams did not attempt to influence the students’ beliefs regarding religion.
9
32.
Shortly after school ended on that day, Principal Vidmar entered the classroom
10
and asked Mr. Williams “why God was being taught” during class.
33.
11
12
facilitated a short discussion on the subject of “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance.
34.
13
14
Mr. Williams explained that a student had asked a question and that he had
In October 2003, during a lesson on Christopher Columbus, the textbook
referenced Columbus as a “missionary” seeking to spread Christianity.
15
35.
A School student asked Mr. Williams: “What’s a Christian?”
16
36.
Mr. Williams replied: “Someone who follows the teachings of Jesus Christ.”
17
37.
Shortly after school ended on that day, Principal Vidmar entered the classroom
18
and asked Mr. Williams: “What are you doing talking about Jesus Christ?”
19
38.
Mr. Williams explained that he had responded to a student’s direct question
20
regarding content in the textbook and did not attempt to influence the students’ beliefs regarding
21
Christianity.
22
23
39.
curriculum-related literature for his students to understand the topic under study.
24
25
Mr. Williams frequently supplements the district-approved textbooks with
40.
It is not uncommon for teachers within the District to supplement District
textbooks with curriculum-related literature and other handouts.
26
41.
Mr. Williams chooses supplemental literature that, in his judgment as a
27
professional educator, satisfy the California History-Social Science content standards for the fifth
28
grade.
SECOND AMENDED VERIFIED COMPLAINT - 5
CASE NO. 5:04-CV-4946 JW PVT
1
2
3
42.
Many teachers employed by the District supplement the textbooks for each
subject with curriculum-related literature and other handouts.
43.
In his judgment as a professional educator, Mr. Williams cannot satisfy the
4
California History-Social Science content standards for the fifth grade if he does not supplement
5
the textbooks with historical literature and other appropriate handouts.
6
44.
In November 2003, Mr. Williams distributed to his students a supplemental
7
activity assignment that he had used in previous years in conjunction with the “The Lion, the
8
Witch, and the Wardrobe” by C.S. Lewis, which is on the school’s approved reading list.
9
45.
One of the nine possible activities in the supplement – Mr. Williams asked the
10
students to choose five – asked students to discuss Mr. Lewis’ intention to write the book as a
11
Christian allegory.
12
46.
Aware of Principal Vidmar’s quick reaction to the student-initiated discussion of
13 “under God” and the mention of “Jesus Christ” in Mr. Williams’ classroom, Mr. Williams
14 proactively gave a copy of the activity assignment to Principal Vidmar.
15
47.
Visibly annoyed, Principal Vidmar asked Mr. Williams: “What are you doing?”
16
48.
Mr. Williams explained that he had used the same handout in previous years with
17 no complaints.
18
49.
Principal Vidmar then approved the C.S. Lewis activity assignment.
19
50.
In late November 2003, aware of Principal Vidmar’s quick reaction to the
20 student-initiated discussion of “under God,” the mention of “Jesus Christ,” and the C.S. Lewis
21 activity assignment, Mr. Williams informed Principal Vidmar that he planned to distribute a
22
“Myth/Fact” handout about Thanksgiving from The History Channel website and a handout
23
containing President Bush’s Thanksgiving proclamation.
24
51.
Because of Principal Vidmar’s reactions in the past, Mr. Williams also invited
25 Principal Vidmar to observe the lesson if she so chose.
26
52.
Principal Vidmar approved the lesson and came to observe the lesson where Mr.
27 Williams distributed these handouts. Mr. Williams went through the “Myth/Fact” handout with
28 the students, and then read portions of President Bush’s Thanksgiving proclamation.
SECOND AMENDED VERIFIED COMPLAINT - 6
CASE NO. 5:04-CV-4946 JW PVT
1
53.
In December 2003 and January 2004, Mr. Williams presented a series of lessons
2
on the various winter holidays. Mr. Williams instructed his students that the origin of the word
3
“holiday” comes from the words “holy day.” Each student was to pick a holiday and write a
4
report about it. Mr. Williams facilitated student discussion of each holiday – Ramadan, Dewali,
5
Kwanzaa, Hanukkah, Christmas, and the Chinese New Year – usually one discussion per day.
6
7
8
54.
Mr. Williams received no complaints from Principal Vidmar nor anyone else
about the holiday assignment, despite the religious connotations of several of the holidays.
55.
In April 2004, Mr. Williams distributed an Easter Card to school staff and fellow
9
teachers. The Card contained ideas obtained from an education website for ways teachers could
10
inform students about the Easter holiday in the classroom without violating the Establishment
11
Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
12
13
14
56.
Mr. Williams prepared an Easter activity sheet for students, with ideas similar to
those found in the Easter Card, and submitted it to Principal Vidmar for approval.
57.
On April 7, 2004, Principal Vidmar denied the Easter activity sheet via email,
15
stating that “Easter and Christianity should not be part of your classroom instruction or
16
discussions.”
17
58.
In the same email, Principal Vidmar for the first time wrongly accused Mr.
18 Williams of “being insensitive to our diverse religious community by insisting on focusing on
19 your own beliefs in the classroom.”
20
59.
Principal Vidmar provided no specific complaints or examples in the email to
21 support her accusation.
22
60.
On May 6, 2004, Mr. Williams provided students with a handout containing the
23
history of the National Day of Prayer on one side of the page, and President Bush’s proclamation
24
of a Day of Prayer on the other.
25
26
27
28
61.
A parent with a student in Mr. Williams’ class emailed a complaint about this
handout to Mr. Williams and to Principal Vidmar.
62.
Mr. Williams responded to the parent via email, explaining that he had included
the document during the class lessons about George Washington and the first Continental
SECOND AMENDED VERIFIED COMPLAINT - 7
CASE NO. 5:04-CV-4946 JW PVT
1
Congress as an example of the historical integration of prayer into the society of the founding
2
era.
3
63.
On May 11, 2004, Principal Vidmar issued a memo to Mr. Williams stating, inter
4
alia, that “[i]t is not appropriate for you to be sending home material of a religious nature to your
5
students and their families.” The memo also states: “I . . . am, hereby, directing you to stop
6
sending out materials of a religious nature with your students. I am directing you to provide me
7
with an ‘advance’ copy of materials you will be sending home at least two days prior to their
8
being sent out so I can make sure that the materials will not be of concern to the parents or
9
violate the separation of religion and public education.” (emphasis added).
10
64.
During the meeting with Principal Vidmar where Mr. Williams received the May
11
11, 2004 memo, Mr. Williams expressed his continued desire to follow all of the rules of the
12
school and district, and to comply with federal and state law regarding the discussion of religion
13
in public schools.
14
65.
On May 14, 2004, Mr. Williams informed Principal Vidmar that his students were
15
experiencing confusion over the “separation of church and state.” He requested permission to
16
distribute a number of handouts to his students as part of a forty-five (45) minute lesson to
17
demonstrate the founder’s beliefs about religion, and how those beliefs influenced the way the
18
United States government was formed. These documents included:
19
20
a. “American Independence was Achieved Upon the Principles of Christianity” by
John Adams;
21
b. “What Great Leaders Have Said About the Bible” – author unknown;
22
c. Letter, “To the Officers of the First Brigade of the Third Division of the Militia of
23
Massachusetts” (October 1, 1798), by John Adams,
24
d. “Religious Clauses in State Constitutions” – author unknown;
25
e. “John Adam’s Diary,” (selected entries Feb. 22, 1756 – Aug. 24, 1796);
26
f. “George Washington’s Prayer Journal,” from William J. Johnson, George
27
Washington: the Christian 24-35 (1919);
28
SECOND AMENDED VERIFIED COMPLAINT - 8
CASE NO. 5:04-CV-4946 JW PVT
1
g. “The Conversion of Quaker Isaac Potts to the Cause of Patriotism through the
2
Observation of George Washington’s Prayer,” from Rev. Nathanial Randolph
3
Snowden, Diary and Remembrances;
4
h. “George Washington’s Adopted Daughter Discusses Washington’s Religious
5
Character,” by Nelly Custis-Lewis;
6
i. “The First Prayer in Congress,” by Jacob Duche (Sept. 7, 1774); and
7
j. “Commentaries on the Laws of England,” by William Blackstone (selected
8
excerpts).
9
66.
Each of these historical documents contains religious references.
10
67.
Each of these historical documents has non-religious, educational value.
11
68.
None of these documents contains exhortations for the students to follow
12
13
14
Christianity or Mr. Williams’ personal religious beliefs.
69.
Mr. Williams did not intend to distribute all of these documents to students as part
of the short lesson he was preparing.
15
70.
16
these documents.
17
71.
18
19
On May 14, 2004, Principal Vidmar denied permission to distribute or discuss
In accordance with Principal Vidmar’s instructions, Mr. Williams did not handout
or discuss these documents.
72.
On May 18, 2004, Mr. Williams emailed Principal Vidmar seeking permission to
20
distribute three documents as part of a short lesson on why religious language is in the
21
Declaration of Independence. These included excerpts from
22
a. the Declaration of Independence,
23
b. William Penn’s “Frame of Government”; and
24
c. Samuel Adams’ “The Rights of the Colonists.”
25
73.
Each of these historical documents contains religious references.
26
74.
Each of these historical documents have non-religious, historical value.
27
75.
None of these documents contains exhortations for the students to follow
28
Christianity or Mr. Williams’ personal religious beliefs.
SECOND AMENDED VERIFIED COMPLAINT - 9
CASE NO. 5:04-CV-4946 JW PVT
1
76.
In the May 18, 2004 email, Mr. Williams reiterated to Principal Vidmar his desire
2
for the students to understand why many of our historical documents contain religious references
3
and how the founders’ religious beliefs influenced the formation of our government.
4
Williams also expressed his feeling that everything religious was being censored from his
5
curriculum because of his personal beliefs. Mr. Williams also repeated his desire to follow all of
6
the rules of the school and district, and to comply with federal and state law regarding the
7
discussion of religion in public schools.
8
77.
Mr.
In a memo dated May 19, 2004, Principal Vidmar denied Mr. Williams’ request to
9 distribute the three documents, stating, inter alia, that “[t]he materials you submitted yesterday
10 are once again of religious nature and are not appropriate to be used with your fifth grade
11 students because the district honors separation of church and state in school.”
12
78.
In the May 19, 2004 memo, Principal Vidmar also instructed Mr. Williams to
13 submit his weekly lesson plans to her for the remainder of the school year.
14
79.
On May 21, 2004, Principal Vidmar called for a meeting with Mr. Williams to be
15 held on May 27, 2004.
16
80.
On May 27, 2004, Principal Vidmar issued a memo ordering him, inter alia, not
17
to emphasize his religion in the classroom and to “cease seeking Christian materials to present as
18
supplementary materials and resources” for his students.” The memo also states: “If any future
19 incidents occur, you will be subject to formal discipline up to and including dismissal.”
20
81.
On June 22, 2004, Mr. Williams responded to the May 27, 2004 memo by
21
pointing out that he had never actually distributed to students any of the documents referenced in
22
the memo except for the National Day of Prayer handout. Mr. Williams also repeated his desire
23
to follow all of the rules of the school and district, and to comply with federal and state law
24
regarding the discussion of religion in public schools.
25
82.
On September 29, 2004, at Mr. Williams’ “Goals conference,” Principal Vidmar
26 issued a packet of materials to Mr. Williams and directed that Mr. William’s future social studies
27
handouts must only come from that packet of materials.
28
SECOND AMENDED VERIFIED COMPLAINT - 10
CASE NO. 5:04-CV-4946 JW PVT
1
83.
At that same “Goals conference,” Principal Vidmar and District employee Pat
2
McCreary made it clear that Mr. Williams could be subject to dismissal if he distributed
3
handouts other than those contained in the packet of materials Mr. Williams had just received.
4
84.
Since approximately May 14, 2004, Principal Vidmar has systematically rejected
5
Mr. Williams’ proposed lesson plans and proposed supplemental handouts referenced herein that
6
contain information about the role religion played in the founding of our country.
7
8
85.
Principal Vidmar rejected the proposed lesson plans and proposed supplemental
handouts referenced herein because of their religious content.
9
86.
Mr. Williams has not distributed any document or taught any lesson rejected by
10
Principal Vidmar.
11
87.
Other teachers at the School who have been the subject of parental complaints
12
regarding their instructional speech are not required to submit all of their lesson plans and
13
supplemental handouts to Principal Vidmar in advance.
14
88.
Other teachers at the School who have been the subject of parental complaints
15
regarding their instructional speech are not required to use supplemental handouts only from a
16
packet issued by Principal Vidmar.
17
18
89.
Less than five percent of all of Mr. Williams’ supplemental handouts actually
distributed throughout the school year contain references to religion.
19
90.
Mr. Williams does not emphasize religion in his classroom.
20
91.
Other than the religious references that occasionally occur in the textbook
21
readings, student discussions, his prepared lesson plans, and supplemental handouts during the
22
school year, Mr. Williams does not distribute religious material to students.
23
92.
Other than religious references that occasionally occur in the textbook readings,
24
student questions, his prepared lesson plans, and supplemental handouts during the school year,
25
Mr. Williams does not discuss religion with students when acting in his capacity as a public
26
school teacher.
27
28
93.
Mr. Williams does not discuss his personal religious beliefs with students when
acting in his capacity as a public school teacher.
SECOND AMENDED VERIFIED COMPLAINT - 11
CASE NO. 5:04-CV-4946 JW PVT
1
94.
Defendants have a policy, practice, and/or custom of prohibiting teachers from
2
engaging in curriculum-related instructional speech about Christianity if the teacher adheres to
3
orthodox Christian beliefs, even if the teacher is not attempting to influence the students’
4
religious beliefs.
5
95.
6
7
This policy, practice, and/or custom does not apply to similarly situated teachers
who do not adhere to orthodox Christian beliefs.
96.
Defendants have a policy, practice, and/or custom of prohibiting teachers from
8
distributing to students curriculum-related documents containing Christian speech if the teacher
9
adheres to orthodox Christian beliefs, even if the teacher is not attempting to influence the
10
11
students’ religious beliefs.
97.
This policy, practice, and/or custom does not apply to similarly situated teachers
12
who do not adhere to orthodox Christian beliefs.
13
California State Law
14
98.
15
Nothing in this code shall be construed to prevent, or exclude from the public
schools, references to religion or references to or the use of religious literature,
dance, music, theatre, and visual arts or other things having a religious
significance when such references or uses do not constitute instruction in religious
principles or aid to any religious sect, church, creed, or sectarian purpose and
when such references or uses are incidental to or illustrative of matters properly
included in the course of study.
16
17
18
California Education Code § 51511 states:
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
99.
On its face, California Educational Code § 51511 permits, inter alia, “religious
literature” and “other things having a religious significance” as part of the school curriculum.
California’s History-Social Science Content Standards
100.
The California Department of Education has promulgated content standards for
fifth grade curriculum taught in California public schools, including the District’s schools.
101.
The District’s schools are required to educate fifth grade students according to the
State’s content standards.
27
28
SECOND AMENDED VERIFIED COMPLAINT - 12
CASE NO. 5:04-CV-4946 JW PVT
1
102.
The California Department of Education has published the content standards
2
governing history and the social sciences as part of a book entitled “History-Social Science
3
Framework for California Public Schools Kindergarten through Grade Twelve” (“Framework”).
4
103.
In that book, the History-Social Science Content Standards for Grade Five are
5
entitled “United States History and Geography: Making a New Nation.” A true and correct copy
6
of these standards (including the cover pages of the Framework) is attached as Exhibit A.
7
104.
The introduction to the History-Social Science Content Standards for Grade Five
8 state: “This course focuses on one of the most remarkable stories in history: the creation of a new
9 nation . . . founded on the Judeo-Christian heritage. . . .” Ex. A at 64.
10
105.
This nation was founded on the Judeo-Christian heritage.
11
106.
Standard 5.2.2 states “Explain . . . the reasons Europeans chose to explore and
12 colonize the world (e.g., the Spanish Reconquista, the Protestant Reformation, the Counter
13 Reformation).” Id. at 71.
14
107.
Standard 5.4 requires that the “Student understand the political, religious, social,
15 and economic institutions that evolved in the colonial area.” Id. at 72.
16
108.
Standard 5.4.2 states: “Identify the major individuals and groups responsible for
17 the founding of the various colonies and the reasons for their founding (e.g., . . . William Penn,
18 Pennsylvania. . . .).” Id.
19
109.
Standard 5.4.3 states: “Describe the religious aspects of the earliest colonies (e.g.,
20 Puritanism in Massachusetts, Anglicanism in Virginia, Catholicism in Maryland, Quakerism in
21 Pennsylvania).” Id.
22
110.
Standard 5.4.4 states: “Identify the significance and leaders of the First Great
23 Awakening, which marked a shift in religious ideas, practices, and allegiances in the colonial
24 period, the growth of religious toleration, and free exercise of religions.” Id.
25
111.
Standard 5.5.1 states: “Understand how political, religious, and economic ideas
26 and interests brought about the Revolution. . . .” Id.
27
112.
Standard 5.7.6 states: “Know the songs that express American ideals (e.g.,
28 ‘America the Beautiful,’ ‘The Star Spangled Banner’).”
SECOND AMENDED VERIFIED COMPLAINT - 13
CASE NO. 5:04-CV-4946 JW PVT
1
2
113.
The Framework contains a list of “analysis skills” in conjunction with the content
standards. Ex. A at 75.
3
114.
The analysis skills under “Research, Evidence, and Point of View” require that:
1.
2.
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
3.
Students differentiate between primary and secondary sources.
Students pose relevant questions about events they encounter in historical
documents, eyewitness accounts, oral histories, letters, diaries, artifacts,
photographs, maps, artworks, and architectures.
Students distinguish fact from fiction by comparing documentary sources
on historical figures and events with fictionalized characters and events.
Id.
115.
On their face, the California History-Social Science Content Standards require,
inter alia, teaching about religion’s influence on society and the founding of this country.
116.
Appendix C of the Framework discusses teaching about religion in public schools.
Id. at 203.
12
117.
13
Appendix F of the Framework discusses the importance of and encourages the use
of primary source docume nts. Id. at 214.
14
Cupertino Union School District Content Standards
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
118.
The District has promulgated content standards for fifth grade curriculum taught
in District schools.
119.
Standard 4 under “United States History and Geography: Making a New Nation”
requires that: “Students understand the political, religious, social, and economic institutions that
evolved in the colonial era.”
120.
On their face, the District’s content standards require, inter alia, that students
receive objective instruction about religion.
22
VI.
23
STATEMENTS OF LAW
24
25
26
121.
Each and all of the acts alleged herein were done by Defendants under the color
and pretense of state law, statutes, ordinances, regulations, customs, usages, and policies of
Cupertino Union School District, Santa Clara County, and the State of California.
27
28
SECOND AMENDED VERIFIED COMPLAINT - 14
CASE NO. 5:04-CV-4946 JW PVT
1
2
3
4
5
122.
Teachers do not shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate. Tinker v.
Des Moines Indep. Cmty. Sch. Dist., 393 U.S. 503, 506 (1969).
123.
Teachers have academic freedom rights within the reasonable limits of the state’s
education content standards.
124.
Unless and until the enforcement of the Defendants’ religiously discriminatory
6 policy and/or practice is enjoined, the Plaintiff will suffer and continue to suffer irreparable harm
7 to his federal constitutional rights.
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
SECOND AMENDED VERIFIED COMPLAINT - 15
CASE NO. 5:04-CV-4946 JW PVT
1
VII.
2
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION - VIOLATION OF THE EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE
UNDER THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
125.
The allegations contained in all preceding paragraphs are incorporated herein by
reference.
126.
The Equal Protection Clause requires that the government treat similarly-situated
persons equally.
127.
The Defendants allowed similarly-situated teachers to include religious
expression in their lessons and supplemental handouts.
128.
The Defendants do not require similarly-situated teachers to submit their lesson
plans and supplemental handouts in advance.
129.
The Defendants do not limit similarly-situated teachers’ choices of supplemental
handouts as they have limited Mr. Williams’ choices.
130.
The Defendants have treated Mr. Williams differently based on the exercise of his
fundamental right to free speech and because he adheres to orthodox Christian beliefs.
131.
Defendants have no compelling interest to justify their unequal treatment of Mr.
Williams.
132.
The Defendants’ policy, practice, and/or custom therefore violates the Equal
Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully prays that the Court grant the relief set forth
hereinafter in the prayer for relief.
22
VIII.
23
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
24
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests the following relief:
25
A. That this Court preserve the pre-litigation status quo by preliminarily enjoining the
26
Defendants from ceasing their policy, practice, and/or custom of prohibiting teachers adhering to
27
orthodox Christian beliefs from distributing curriculum-related supplemental handouts
28
containing Christian speech;
SECOND AMENDED VERIFIED COMPLAINT - 16
CASE NO. 5:04-CV-4946 JW PVT
1
B. That this Court preliminarily and permanently enjoin the Defendants from enforcing
2 their policy, practice, and/or custom of suppressing the use by teachers adhering to orthodox
3 Christian beliefs of lessons and curriculum-related supplements on the basis that they contain
4 Christian religious content or references;
5
C. That this Court enter declaratory judgment stating that the Defendants’ policy,
6 practice, or custom is facially unconstitutional and violates the Plaintiff’s rights as guaranteed
7 under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution;
8
D. If the policy, practice, or custom is not declared facially unconstitutional, that this
9 Court enter a declaratory judgment stating that the policy, practice, or custom is unconstitutional
10 as applied to the Plaintiff and violates the Plaintiff’s rights guaranteed under the Fourteenth
11 Amendment to the United States Constitution;
E. That this Court award Plaintiff his costs and expenses of this action, including
12
13 reasonable attorneys’ fees, in accordance with 42 U.S.C. § 1988, and other applicable law;
F. That this Court grant such other and further relief as the Court deems equitable, just,
14
15
and proper;
16
G. That this Court adjudge, decree and declare the rights and other legal relations of the
17
parties to the subject matter here in controversy, in order that such declarations shall have the
18
force and effect of final judgment; and
19
20
H. That this Court retain jurisdiction of this matter as necessary to enforce the Court’s
orders.
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
SECOND AMENDED VERIFIED COMPLAINT - 17
CASE NO. 5:04-CV-4946 JW PVT
1
Respectfully submitted on this, the 13th day of May, 2005,
2
Attorney for Plaintiff,
3
4
By:
/s/Kevin H. Theriot
5
6
CERTIFICATION OF INTERESTED ENTITIES OR PERSONS
7
Pursuant to Civil L.R. 3-16, the undersigned certifies that as of this date, other than the
8
named parties, there is no such interest to report.
9
Respectfully submitted on this, 13th day of May, 2005.
10
By:
11
12
/s/Kevin H. Theriot
//
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
SECOND AMENDED VERIFIED COMPLAINT - 18
CASE NO. 5:04-CV-4946 JW PVT
VERIFICATION
1
2
I, Stephen J. Williams, a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of
3
California, have read the foregoing Second Amended Verified Complaint for Declaratory and
4
Injunctive Relief and, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746, hereby declare, under penalty of perjury
5
6
7
under the laws of the United States of America, that the foregoing is true and correct.
Dated this 13th day of May, 2005
8
9
By:
/s/Stephen J. Williams
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
SIGNATURE ATTESTATION
Pursuant to the rules and procedures governing electronic filing, I, the undersigned
attorney for Plaintiff Stephen J. Williams, attest that the content of this document is acceptable to
signatory Stephen J. Williams and that I have on file a holograph signature for Mr. Williams’
signature indicated by a "conformed" signature (/S/) within this efiled document.
Dated this 13th day of May, 2005
By:
/s/Kevin H. Theriot
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
SECOND AMENDED VERIFIED COMPLAINT - 19
CASE NO. 5:04-CV-4946 JW PVT
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?